Curry’s fridge nightmare need urgent help

born_again

loulougaga said:

But surely a £1600 fridge freezer should last longer that 5 years under the CSA 2015 6 year ruling and also a warranty should start from when you purchased the item not from manufacturing date ?

Should do & some will last far longer, but others will not.
So if you have one that does not. You do not get a new one (well unless manufacture has a very generous warranty) You get a % refund based on the age of the item. Which tends to be based on 6 year lifespan.

Warranty is over & above your consumer rights & is up to the manufacture what is in it & what you have to do to meet them. (such as a car being serviced as per manufacture spec)

If manufacture does not have/make the parts. Then they can not supply them. 

ButterCheese

This story is a real shame and although I am shocked (for a £1600 appliance) I am not surprised.  I had the same issue with a dishwasher and a  fridge/freezer but they were Candy and only lasted 10 months.  Yes 10 MONTHS of use before they both were faulty.  They weren't the cheapest units either, but were at the budget end of the market.  Engineer said fridge was not economical to repair (had to pay £50 for that, which is fair).  Manufacturer would not replace because the purchase date had exceeded the 12 months for warantee.  This was because the supplier delayed delivery by 3 months, so I only got 10 months use out of it

Also had issues with curries where they have sold me a new laptop that was actually reconditioned.  It took 4 instances of sending it back to engineers who eventually diagnosed that the battery was toast (again, wouldn't happen on a brand new laptop battery). 

I now only buy from trusted appliance retailers who I have now dealt with 3 times (I...O..lets go) even though they cost a bit more, I feel safe dealing with their customer service.  I no longer trust any high street chains, as they put profit before customer service

eskbanker

ButterCheese said:

Also had issues with curries...

Did you move on to eating other things then?

Rodders53

This might allow decoding of the manufacture date from the serial number to see is Samsung are telling fibs or the truth on its age?  https://splaitor.com/how-to-find-out-the-year-of-manufacture-of-a-samsung-refrigerator

I have a Fridge Freezer purchased in Sep 2017 with J8 in serial = made in Aug 2017, in Poland.
I also have a upright freezer with C5 = made in May 2012, in Korea.  I'd need to find a paper receipt for exact purchase date but it was likely in the same year.
Touching wood, neither have given any problems (other than a broken 

Press Currys for a bigger contribution but bear in mind they will likely give vouchers/credit note in preference to cash.

Okell

loulougaga said:

But surely a £1600 fridge freezer should last longer that 5 years under the CSA 2015 6 year ruling and also a warranty should start from when you purchased the item not from manufacturing date ?

You'd think so wouldn't you?  My last fridge lasted 28 years but it was a bog standard fridge freezer - no gimmicks.

First, there is no "6 year rule" in the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  The 6 year thing is entirely separate and is to do with how long after something happens that you can sue somebody for it.  So if you bought something more than 6 years ago, you can't enforce any legal remedies against the seller because the law will not allow you to sue them after 6 years have passed.  But that does not mean that the law says that everything you buy must last for a minimum of 6 years.  Many people misunderstand this - particularly people working for Apple.

So if you'd bought the fridge a year earlier than you did, Currys could have legitimately brushed you off with a "Sorry but we won't help.  You bought it over 6 years ago and legally we don't have to do anything for you".

What most sellers of white goods seem to do in practice when items fail is to "assume" a working life of 6 years and then refund you pro-rata according to how much of that 6 years remains after failure.  From the figures you've given it sounds as if currys are saying you've had 5 years use out of 6 years so they are refunding you for one year.  (1600/6 = 267)

However, I agree that in real life (not in the legal world) you would expect a fridge to last longer - say at least 10 years from purchase.  If I were you I'd do what @the_lunatic_is_in_my_head suggests and go back to Currys and try to bargain with them starting at £800, using the argument that you'd expect a £1600 fridge to last longer than 6 years.

But be aware that currys might not budge and might even threaten to withdraw their offer leaving you having to sue them in court to get anything.  A court might agree with you or they might not.

I think it's fair to say that most posters on this thread think what Currys have offerred is reasonable.  Maybe they're right and the lunatic and I am wrong.  You'd only find out in court and that's a risk...

Regarding the warranty, I'd suggest that of course it ought to start from date of purchase and not from date of manufacture.  I'd be very surprised if the terms of the warranty say date of manufacture - although I suppose it's possible.  Why don't you check the terms you have and see what they say?  If it doesn't say from date of manufacture I'd make a complaint to Samsung that they have misled you regarding the coverage of the warranty.  That doesn't mean they'd be able to fix it for you, but you might be able to squeeze a gesture of good will out of them for telling you something that's blatant rubbish.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Okell said:

First, there is no "6 year rule" in the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  The 6 year thing is entirely separate and is to do with how long after something happens that you can sue somebody for it.  So if you bought something more than 6 years ago, you can't enforce any legal remedies against the seller because the law will not allow you to sue them after 6 years have passed.  But that does not mean that the law says that everything you buy must last for a minimum of 6 years.  Many people misunderstand this - particularly people working for Apple.

@Okell For the CRA the 6 years begins upon delivery because that is when the breach is deemed to have occurred however, purely out of interest, if you have a 10 year warranty and the company refuses to honour it's terms at what point does the breach occur, when the warranty began or when they failed to honour it? 

Emmia

This is what the Samsung site says on refrigerators

Alderbank

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Okell said:

First, there is no "6 year rule" in the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  The 6 year thing is entirely separate and is to do with how long after something happens that you can sue somebody for it.  So if you bought something more than 6 years ago, you can't enforce any legal remedies against the seller because the law will not allow you to sue them after 6 years have passed.  But that does not mean that the law says that everything you buy must last for a minimum of 6 years.  Many people misunderstand this - particularly people working for Apple.

@Okell For the CRA the 6 years begins upon delivery because that is when the breach is deemed to have occurred however, purely out of interest, if you have a 10 year warranty and the company refuses to honour it's terms at what point does the breach occur, when the warranty began or when they failed to honour it? 

In contract law the standard answer is that a breach of contract occurs when one party in a binding agreement fails to deliver according to the terms of the agreement.
The essential item is that the breach has actually occurred. You can't sue for breach of contract because you believe, however genuinely, that the other party might not deliver at some time in the future.
For your warranty, a breach of contract would occur at the point where you attempt to claim and the other party renages. From that date you have a limited time to sue for the breach. In English law that time is usually 3, 6 or 12 years depending on the type of contract.

If you could prove that when the trader sold you the warranty there was no way it could be delivered, you could claim that the breach occurred when you bought the false warranty but proving that might be difficult.

Okell

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Okell said:

First, there is no "6 year rule" in the Consumer Rights Act 2015.  The 6 year thing is entirely separate and is to do with how long after something happens that you can sue somebody for it.  So if you bought something more than 6 years ago, you can't enforce any legal remedies against the seller because the law will not allow you to sue them after 6 years have passed.  But that does not mean that the law says that everything you buy must last for a minimum of 6 years.  Many people misunderstand this - particularly people working for Apple.

@Okell For the CRA the 6 years begins upon delivery because that is when the breach is deemed to have occurred however, purely out of interest, if you have a 10 year warranty and the company refuses to honour it's terms at what point does the breach occur, when the warranty began or when they failed to honour it? 

Right.  I agree that in one sense the starting point for everything under the CRA starts from the point of delivery.

With regards to the 6 years I think I'm just parroting what seems to be the consensus view on this board that a consumer can't sue after 6 years have passed from date of delivery.  I'm not 100% convinced myself that that is what s5 of the Limitation Act 1980 means:  "An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued."  [My bold for emphasis]

In particular I'm not sure what "... the date on which the cause of action accrued" means.

Prior to frequenting this board I'd always understood that in the case of latent defects the limitation period began to run from when the claimant became aware - or should have become aware - of the defect.  Now that makes perfect sense because the whole point of a latent defect is that it is hidden and not obvious.

I don't understand why (1) if a consumer buys an item suffering from a latent or inherent manufacturing defect that is not reasonably discoverable at the date of purchase, and (2) that item fails 3 years later because of that latent or inherent defect, (3) the limitation period runs from the date of purchase and not from three years later which is the first time the defect manifested itself.

I suspect that my uncertainty on this point is wrong - which is why I'm quite happy to parrot the 6 years after date of delivery line and follow what appears to be the general consensus.

Now having read what I think about the 6 years bit, I'm sure you can guess what I think about your 10 year warranty question - but I accept I'd probably be wrong...   

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Thanks @Okell and @Alderbank  

Okell said:

Now having read what I think about the 6 years bit, I'm sure you can guess what I think about your 10 year warranty question - but I accept I'd probably be wrong...   

Alderbank said:

For your warranty, a breach of contract would occur at the point where you attempt to claim and the other party renages. From that date you have a limited time to sue for the breach. In English law that time is usually 3, 6 or 12 years depending on the type of contract.

So if a something had a warranty running passed 6 years and you had paid on credit you could possibly enforce the terms of the warranty upon the credit provider if the manufacturer wasn't honouring the terms (or no longer existed*) even if 6 years had passed from delivery. 

*(in the instance of no longer trading possibly limited to the 6 years from the date the company went under)

Okell said:

With regards to the 6 years I think I'm just parroting what seems to be the consensus view on this board that a consumer can't sue after 6 years have passed from date of delivery.  I'm not 100% convinced myself that that is what s5 of the Limitation Act 1980 means:  "An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued."  [My bold for emphasis]

In particular I'm not sure what "... the date on which the cause of action accrued" means.

Prior to frequenting this board I'd always understood that in the case of latent defects the limitation period began to run from when the claimant became aware - or should have become aware - of the defect.  Now that makes perfect sense because the whole point of a latent defect is that it is hidden and not obvious.

I don't understand why (1) if a consumer buys an item suffering from a latent or inherent manufacturing defect that is not reasonably discoverable at the date of purchase, and (2) that item fails 3 years later because of that latent or inherent defect, (3) the limitation period runs from the date of purchase and not from three years later which is the first time the defect manifested itself.

I had a quick Google before asking and don't really understand a lot of it (good job the consumer regs are written in everyday language!) but "became aware - or should have become aware" is what seems to come up the most.

Like yourself, I say 6 years as that is what has always been said here for the last 14 years and I know no different, I do agree that if you buy a fridge with a compressor that isn't durable how are you supposed to know this at the point delivery (but don't want to take OP's thread too far off topic). 

With the OP, I do think if the manufacturer is offering a 10 year warranty on the compressor there is a good case to say that part should have a 10 year lifespan and either way a £247 offer is very tight on a £1600 fridge after 5.5 years. It does surprise me some seem happy with expensive appliances breaking down so quickly and so little being offer as a reduced refund. 

T&Cs on the Samsung website seem to only refer to the 5 year warranty, can't seem to find T&Cs specifically for the compressor 10/20 year warranty, would be interesting to see, if anything, what they offer when they can't repair/replace the compressor.